Here’s a screen shot from this morning’s Drudge Report, showing the link to the Washington Times article.

And here’s my original post of May 20, 2013, which (all modesty aside) really is more informative and detailed than the Washington Times article. The only difference is I don’t make any money from this, whereas Drudge rakes in millions of dollars a year.

About three months ago, quietly and without anyone noticing, the Obama regime’s Department of Defense (DoD) gave itself the authority to use U.S. military troops to police America without permission from the President of the United States (POTUS) or state or local government.

The U.S. military is prohibited from intervening in domestic affairs, a prohibition codified in two laws:

The Insurrection Act of 1807 is the set of laws that govern the ability of POTUS to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness,insurrection and rebellion. The laws are chiefly contained in 10 U.S.C.§ 331 – 10 U.S.C.§ 335. The general aim is to limit Presidential power as much as possible, relying on state and local governments for initial response in the event of insurrection.

The Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), a U.S. federal law (18 U.S.C.§ 1385) passed after the end of Reconstruction on June 18, 1878, and updated in 1981 to refer specifically to the U.S. Armed Forces, makes unauthorized deployment of federal troops a punishable offense, thereby giving teeth to the Insurrection Act. The PCA does not apply to the U.S. Coast Guard (because the Coast Guard operates under the authority of the Dept. of Homeland Security instead of the Pentagon), nor does the PCA apply to the National Guard (because the National Guard is under state authority and can act in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state’s governor).

The only exception to the deployment of U.S. military troops within the United States is provided under Section 4 of Article IV of the U.S. Constitution, which says: “and [the United States] shall protect each of them [the States] against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.” In other words, Article IV requires the U.S. government to protect each state from invasion and, upon the application of the state legislature (or executive, if the legislature cannot be convened), from domestic violence.

Together, these laws limit executive authority over domestic military action.

About three months ago, however, as reported by Jed Morey for the Long Island Press, the Department of Defense (DoD) unilaterally made a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” and in so doing, granted itself the authority to police America’s streets without obtaining prior presidential, state, or local consent, thereby upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.

Pursuant to those changes, the DoD issued a 42-page Department of Defense Instruction (DODI), No. 3025.21, February 27, 2013. (Click here or here for the PDF of DODI No. 3025.21)

DODI no. 3025.21′s subject is “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies.” Its purpose, “In accordance with the authority in DoD Directive (DoDD) 5111.1 and Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum (References (a) and (b)), is to establish “DoD policy, assigns responsibilities, and provides procedures for DoD support to Federal, State, tribal, and local civilian law enforcement agencies, including responses to civil disturbances within the United States, including the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any territory or possession of the United States or any other political subdivision thereof in accordance with DoDD 3025.18 (Reference (c)).

The most disturbing part of the DODI no. 3025.21 begins on page 15: “Enclosure 3: Participation of DoD Personnel in Civilian Law Enforcement Activities.”

On page 16, under Section 1b’s “Permissible Direct Assistance” is a subsection (3), which states:

When permitted under emergency authority in accordance with Reference (c), Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbancesbecause:

(a) Such activities are necessary to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order; or,

(b) When duly constituted Federal, State, or local authorities are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for Federal property or Federal governmental functions. Federal action, including the use of Federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect Federal property or functions.

Jed Morey of the Long Island Presscites Bruce Afran, a civil liberties attorney and constitutional law professor at Rutgers University, who calls the DODI rule, “a wanton power grab by the military,” which is “quite shocking actually because it violates the long-standing presumption that the military is under civilian control.”

Afran points out that Section 1b(3) of the DODI not only fails to define what circumstances would be so severe that the president’s authorization is “impossible,” it also grants full presidential authority to “Federal military commanders” who have the same power to authorize military force as the president when the latter’s authorization is “impossible” — whatever that means.

As Afran puts it, “These phrases don’t have any legal meaning. It’s no different than the emergency powers clause in the Weimar constitution [of the German Reich]. It’s a grant of emergency power to the military to rule over parts of the country at their own discretion.”

Afran also expresses apprehension over the government’s authority “to engage temporarily in activities necessary to quell large-scale disturbances.” “Governments never like to give up power when they get it,” says Afran. “They still think after twelve years they can get intelligence out of people in Guantanamo. Temporary is in the eye of the beholder. That’s why in statutes we have definitions. All of these statutes have one thing in common and that is that they have no definitions. How long is temporary? There’s none here. The definitions are absurdly broad.”

Afran reminds us that, unlike the military, “the police operate under civilian control. They are used to thinking in a civilian way so the comparison that they may have some assault weapons doesn’t change this in any way. And they can be removed from power. You can’t remove the military from power.” Afran is considering amending his NDAA complaint currently in front of the court to include this regulatory change.

Jed Morey concludes: “for the first time in our history the military has granted itself authority to quell a civil disturbance. Changing this rule now requires congressional or judicial intervention. […] As we witnessed during the Boston bombing manhunt, it’s already difficult to discern between military and police. In the future it might be impossible, because there may be no difference.”

There was a media entertainer with a propensity for ‘tearing up’ who would on a regular basis present ‘breaking news items’ two weeks after we posted. We sent a letter of intent to take action and the fraud, theft stopped! With that said, we see stories appear in other media 1-2 years after we wrote about items…

Dr. Eowyn, I do believe your article gets to the point quicker, and stays on point more substantively than the article linked to Drudge. Great, and truly prescient, work!

Here it goes. That campaign promise to build a special military branch, as well equipped as the others, who’s sole purpose is for internal American problems. He shouted it in 2007, and now he continues to move chess pieces toward the goal.

*Venting* I remember Obama’s “National Police Force” jabber in 2007+, & tried to find others near who felt (like me) washed asea in a tidal wave of Fascisim. Couldn’t BELIEVE a US politician could say it aloud (& then get elected!!!)—even if they thought it! It’s un-Constitutional (the POTUS, head of Armed Forces, can’t legally call for more than 75,000 armed men at one time/place to put down insurrection let alone assemble an undetermined # of armed National Police Force under a centralized Fed. Gov’t.-ONLY CONGRESS can call # beyond that for any reason whatever… Constitution PROTECTS us—supposedly—fr an executive who’d use a FEDERAL armed force against citizens for purely law enforcement (at risk of using it for political gain/enforcement). Was OBAMA in on this DOD “sneak attack” on US Code…&, in fact, how can they do this w/o Congress? Can it stand up to judicial review? I find very very few around me who “see” any of this.. For Pete’s sake, they know Miley Cyrus/what “twerking’ is…but they can’t define Fascism…can’t talk intelligently abt contents of their own Bill of Rights…or WHERE you might find it in our National documents….As long as they have free “bread & circuses” everything is A-OK w/them.

And, more reasons than “Revolution” to cling to your Bibles & guns….How about “just” the integrity of your family, your property, your health, or food, or meds? How abt when everyone else is starving—or JUST feeling “entitled” you protect your garden, your pets (do you want to hear the time I had to rescue my aged calico cat fr someone who took her fr my front yard & was going to turn her into a purse for the San Diego flea market???? Or, my neighbor’s kid who tried to steal my 19-yr-old cat to feed to his Boa Constrictor?? Guess who won? Long story… )….your food sources…your meds….your water source (b/c for God’s Sake…we don’t have much “say” over where our tax money is spent…but “they” will come after all of the above in some way, eventually…if not already ). When a chief executive of the USA can call for armed National Police Force..Can you see a day when death panels” under Obamacare can not only deny curative or palliative measures to the aged or infirm (of any age) but do so by taking CUSTODY of them—to send off to the “soilent green” farm or use them for a national “study” ( a’la Massachusetts case). Can you see a time when, if the VA can invent fictitious lists to “show” that they are treating people whom they, in fact, will NEVER be seen by a VA doctor ….even if they die by the hundreds sitting in the parking lot…that the VA one day could , like Obamacare, make a secret list of ills & people they simply refuse to see (they “know best” ) & whom they might just shuffle off to a “death farm–& call them “terminal patients?” And who gets to decide if/when they are “terminal” & “beyond treatment?—FOR SURE…if they are never diagnosed or treated …they WILL die…we’ve just seen case ONE in this late VA scandal…but what is that point of no return & who dictates when pure NEGLECT delivers you to that point?) How about this one….Many States & Feds (recent Clean Water Act) now can regulate the water that falls on your property ….either to tax it…or, NOW, to fine & regulate you off your property even if there’s a PUDDLE or seasonal water dtich……the list can go on (better watch out for those kiddy pools you forget to dump for 3 days) b/c we haven’t even talked about food or pharmacy….or the power of the IRS to punish/break you for political beliefs….or the fact that the Supreme Crt has already upheld the “right” of local governments to seize your property under imminent domain…but NOT for public projects (as in the past…roads, bridges, parks…water rights, so on) BUT just for the fact they MIGHT be able to give it to another owner who MIGHT raise more tax revenue than YOU do w/your measly property tax …like, take your property to give to another PRIVATE individual/firm to develop…into a mall or water park or Motel 6….private businesses…NOT public benefit….but POLITICAL & PRIVATE benefit. SHADES of MAGNA CARTA!!!! Is there a boat leaving here soon for nether parts where we can settle in & write laws that prohibit this crap/ill use of us as citizens? (Irony apleanty).

DRives me crazy: I’m teaching history students that our gov’t. “Derives it’s existence/power ONLY from-the governed.” It IS…only because WE ARE …not through merit of its own. It IS only to serve US, not to serve itself…. Lately, I feel like I’m telling the biggest/baddest lie to kids….It’s no surprise the more power the central gov’t takes unto itself, the less power individuals have to influence/control it as “an instument of the governed.” It’ sort of becomes that hideous plant in “Little Shop of Horrors.” KEEP YOUR POWDER DRY!

We do have articles for Impeachment for a reason….I can’t imagine the amount of evil and destruction this POS will do to this country with 3+ years to go. Actually, if (or when) BO or congress were to enact martial law…it wouldn’t be 3+ years, it would be indefinite.

Forget the Constitution, it died on the day of history’s largest controlled demolition, 9-11. Everything thing that has occurred since then as far as legislation, executive order, black ops project, military planning and societal deception has one goal in mind. The institution of Martial Law in the United States, and the end of freedom and liberty as we know it. They are simply waiting for the right opportunity, a man-made or naturally occurring cataclysmic event: natural disaster, epidemic, “terrorist attack”, financial collapse or war. It is not a question of if, but when. The goal? Eliminate the U.S. as a viable world power, and thereby facilitate the creation of the One World Government and the One Universal Church.

Thank you Dr. Eowyn for this significant post. Clearly, you had more insight than the Washington Times, and your setting forth of the facts, your reasoning and your conclusions are spot on. It appears that the U.S. Military is becoming more like the Roman praetorian guard, which seemed to decide throughout history which Caesars would live or die. Amazing!